[Gaming] Would you pay per hour?

[ShiverMePenguins]

I have over 2000 hours combined between CSS and CSGO, no way I'm trying to pay per hour for that haha

if thats .25 cents an hour you're looking at 500 bucks right there. how about no.

[Murdoch]

Are EA gonna follow in the footsteps of Dreamworks

 

Factoring in a combination of Hours Played + Screen Resolution + Screen Size + Game Type

 

To get a total price that you owe them for playing their irresistible Intellectual Properties.

[Trail Mixorz]

if thats .25 cents an hour you're looking at 500 bucks right there. how about no.

Exactly I got CSS in a pack with Gmod for 10 bucks and CSGO for 3.74 haha 

[legodude]

No I'd never pay per hour, I'd never feel I could relax playing a game always having to play at 110% effort, like in an MMO I'd feel bad doing jumping puzzles/ secondary skills like fishing or cooking. I'd also never want to let friends play on my games when they come to my house. another point if the game cost £0.50 an hour after a full day gaming (say 8-10 hours) it cost around £5.00... I might as well just pay for a month.

[MetEishYa]

Are EA gonna follow in the footsteps of Dreamworks

 

Factoring in a combination of Hours Played + Screen Resolution + Screen Size + Game Type

 

To get a total price that you owe them for playing their irresistible Intellectual Properties.

haha charge per fps. 100 fps $10/day

[Theo]

Yes it does. It means you are stealing from a business. You are stealing from artists, coders, designers, producers, leads, c.s reps, and more.

 

Piraters come out with these thought up statistics that not paying for a game is ok, because they wouldn't have bought it otherwise. Going by that same logic if I go to a restaurant and not pay its ok, because I wasn't going to go eat out if I had to pay for it.

 

 

Just because YOU try to rationalize things to make yourself feel better at night doesn't mean you aren't a thief.

Lol k whatever floats your boat.

Also that analogy is a fail since I consume something at the restaurant meaning they lose money. Me downloading a game that I wouldn't buy have makes no difference since they wouldn't get my money anyway.

Also I would so download a car if I could, you're probably one of those people who think piracy is a federal crime

[Suika]

Pay per hour to a limit.

If it's pay per hour UP TO $60, I'd do that. Like even at $1/hour. This gives me a better chance to fully experience the game before deciding I love it or hate it, and a better motive for developers to add in more hours of content without pay-out-the-ass-prices for DLC.

[totjup5]

I'd rather just buy the game. I hate cloud gaming. And I don't like subscription based games either.

[Ryoku]

Third option.. Pay per hour up to cost of retail game.. 

 

While I like this option more then the OPs choices he listed, I'd still rather steam sale prices or CD key site prices.

[MrTomnus]

Third option.. Pay per hour up to cost of retail game.. 

 

 

here is what will happen in the long run, if pay/hour method is implemented.

players will pay for few hours for some games that they think they can finish the story/campaign fast, this starts to be a common thing between the player, and the developers end up stretching the story/campaign with useless stuff just to make u spend more time so they get more money, which is bad ofc.

 

"the above works only if the rate/hour is low/ acceptable, which is why u would go for that method in the first place."

 

 

That was the problem I thought about. The idea is great but you will get the people who rush through a campaign and complete everything quickly, and the devs wont get the same money from them as the ones who take the time to complete the game "properly" or people who are slower anyway.

 

I think the best payment scheme is pay per "chapter" or "section". So if you get to a section of a game it will stop and ask that  if you want to keep playing you'll need to pay the fee for this next section of the game. That way people can try an extended demo for a small cost by making the first section cheap, then upping the price a bit for those who want to keep going with the game, until you've paid the full retail price of the game at the end of the campaign, by which time you "own" it.

 

The only problem with this is not all the money made in development would be made back as quickly as it relies on everybody who buys the game completing it, and in addition revenue would come in slower as well in waiting for people to play through the game as opposed to one large initial purchase. It would be a nice model though, and one that I'd be happy to buy into.

[TheNinjaNextDor]

If what you payed per hour goes to buying it I would.

[D4RK]

That was the problem I thought about. The idea is great but you will get the people who rush through a campaign and complete everything quickly, and the devs wont get the same money from them as the ones who take the time to complete the game "properly" or people who are slower anyway.

 

I think the best payment scheme is pay per "chapter" or "section". So if you get to a section of a game it will stop and ask that  if you want to keep playing you'll need to pay the fee for this next section of the game. That way people can try an extended demo for a small cost by making the first section cheap, then upping the price a bit for those who want to keep going with the game, until you've paid the full retail price of the game at the end of the campaign, by which time you "own" it.

 

The only problem with this is not all the money made in development would be made back as quickly as it relies on everybody who buys the game completing it, and in addition revenue would come in slower as well in waiting for people to play through the game as opposed to one large initial purchase. It would be a nice model though, and one that I'd be happy to buy into.

the chapter method is good, but if u are going to play the first few chapters to demo the game, thats like paying for demo which i think all devs should make free demos for their games before they release them.

its good that we can try the game, but u feel its ur right to have a free demo kinda.

[Brandonsr]

What you are suggesting sounds like the old blockbuster days. Go in rent a game beat it that night and return it the following day and repeat.

 

I would rather pay full price for most games. Honestly I believe that would be the cheapest option for me.

[deafboy]

Pirating.  Procuring an item illegally.

 

Stealing.  Procuring an item illegally.

 

Pirating and Stealing are synonyms.

 

The item doesn't need to be a physical object that is taken.  

[Askew]

In South Korea I think that's pretty common in the PC Bangs, pay per hour to play PC games is a widespread and successful business there, they also provide the PC so hardware costs are also factored into the one hourly price.

[deafboy]

Talked to a friend today about it and he made a point I didn't even think about it.  We did this as children.  When gaming wasn't really in the household and we had to go to arcades to play.

[Vitalius]

Pirating.  Procuring an item illegally.

 

Stealing.  Procuring an item illegally.

 

Pirating and Stealing are synonyms.

 

The item doesn't need to be a physical object that is taken.  

I disagree. 

They are inherently different in how they affect the person that is taken from. i.e. I stole from [person]. I pirated from [person]. 

If I stole, the person no longer has what I now have. If I pirated, we both have it now. That's how computers work. Instead of them sending me their bits and deleting theirs, they just make a copy. Then we both have it.

Stealing is wrong because it takes something from someone that they earned in some fashion or another that you didn't. Because piracy is different, I would argue it isn't wrong.

If I could "steal" a loaf of bread from you and instead of only me having it, we both have one now (doubling the bread), I'm pretty sure stealing wouldn't be illegal and in fact would be encouraged. 

Just because something is illegal doesn't mean it's wrong.

[deafboy]

That isn't the case though. And maybe that's the issue a lot of companies have with pirates, that they don't think it's stealing.

So you're saying if I broke into Microsoft with a USB drive and copied all of the source code and miscellaneous documents that I didn't steal anything from Microsoft?

I really don't understand the disconnect. They are synonymous.

[BobIsGaming]

If I paid $.05/hour than maybe, that way I don't regret buying bad games

[Sauron]

As much as I love gaming there are certainly a lot of games that I wouldn't be willing to pay full price for.

 

So for a minute, let's assume you had two options with gaming.

1)  Pay X amount per hour of game play

2)  Pay full retail price (no sales).

 

Would you ever opt to pay per hour for a game?  If so, what would you be willing to pay?

 

Was talking about this today and there are a lot of games in my Library that I've only played for a couple hours because the game just wasn't my style.  Then there are other games I've played for hundreds of hours.  So if it was possible, you could essentially demo the game by paying by the hour and if you really like it and you see there being significant value with the game you could pay full retail for the game.  But if you don't find much value in the game you can pay for however much you want essentially.

 

It essentially comes down to, how much do you value an hour of entertainment?

if I don't like a game enough that I'm willing to pay retail for it it's not worth my time imo. also, the sub fee system is simply a scam and moneygrabbing in my opinion. if retail is overpriced as is, why should I be willing to pay 60$ a year to play the game?

[Strider]

No, I hate the pay to play model far more then the free to play one. I hate being forced to pay to play a video game, I would rather either just buy it outright and be done with it, or have it be free to play and have optional in-game purchases. Even with micro-transactions being a slippery slope that can easily be abused, I would still pick that over being forced to pay to play anything.

[_TechPuppet_]

I'd never pay per hour. I tend to get addicted to games and would be broke in no time. Literally. I would. I'd run out of money and then go into withdrawal.